The Plaintiff, Ladislav Kunzo was employed as a Boner in a meat packing facility run by the Defendant, Kepak Longford Unlimited Company.  On the morning of the 14th September 2016 while at work boning large pieces of meat, the Plaintiff felt a sudden onset of sever lower back pain which caused him to collapse and require assistance from colleagues. Following a visit to the Company doctor the Plaintiff was given a pain-relieving injection and was unfit for work for a period of approximately 72 weeks.

He consulted with his Solicitor and an initial letter of claim was sent to his employer the Defendant on the 19th October 2016.  This was subsequently followed up by a personal injury summons on the 4th August 2017.  In summary, the plaintiff alleged in his personal injury summons, that the defendant had been negligent in the following respects: requiring him to lift excessive weights; failing to ensure that the task was carried out in a safe and proper manner; failing to train the plaintiff adequately or at all; failing to provide adequate assistance and/or equipment to enable the plaintiff to carry out the task safely and requiring the plaintiff to work excessively long hours and to carry out his work under excessive time constraints.

On 18th November, 2019, an order for discovery was made on consent of the parties, directing the defendant to make discovery of the following categories of documents: (a) all safety statements and risk assessments in being at the time and time of the accident; (b) all documents relevant to job rotation and rest periods for three months prior to the date and time of the accident; (c) all relevant training and instruction documentation; (d) the accident report form, and (e) all relevant CCTV footage.  The defendant claimed legal privilege over the accident report form and therefore did not provide it.   The plaintiff sought an order that the accident report form be produced on the basis that it was compiled prior to his claim being lodged and was not therefore made in contemplation of litigation.

However, the Defendant stated that almost all workplace accidents resulted in personal injury litigation and, as such, all accidents were treated as potentially giving rise to litigation. Therefore, the Defendant claimed that it was necessary to conduct a full investigation of every accident to properly defend the expected action. The Defendant also stated that it relied heavily on the investigation report to assess its exposure in a given case.

The High Court determined that the accident report form was not created for submission to the Health and Safety Authority but was in fact a report of a comprehensive investigation into the circumstances of the accident, in preparation for anticipated litigation and is therefore covered by litigation privilege and need not be produced to the plaintiff.
https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/2eacdfcc-48bc-42ec-bda9-22024760fd04/2021_IEHC_180.pdf/pdf#view=fitH